Subject: Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons From: "Sebastian Rahtz" <sebastian.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2000 23:36:42 +0100 (BST) |
Paul Tchistopolskii writes: > When I was experimenting with different XSLT engines, > I found that only XT survived processing of large documents, > all other engines fail to scale - the result usually was the > "blow up" described above. I would have agreed, until the 5.3 generation of Saxon. Have you been able to push that over yet? I have not. > Unfortunately, SAXON lacks some things which I'm using > in XT and it is not as compact as XT ( because SAXON > is solving many-many problems which are not interesting > to me). if only James would add support for key().... sebastian XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Paul Tchistopolskii | Thread | Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Paul Tchistopolskii |
Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Sebastian Rahtz | Date | Re: XSL/T Engine Comparisons, Paul Tchistopolskii |
Month |